tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7797210537401100321.post8102976018993808817..comments2013-05-20T12:07:16.308-04:00Comments on Solidarity, Subsidiarity, and Christ Our King: "I Will Not Leave You Orphans."--Why God's Plan Will Triumph Over the HHS MandateDonniehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11652866052000790463noreply@blogger.comBlogger14125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7797210537401100321.post-15272084169722360062013-03-18T15:09:51.394-04:002013-03-18T15:09:51.394-04:00Thank you for asking. I sent a note to my archbish...Thank you for asking. I sent a note to my archbishop asking if I had reported things correctly in this article, but I have not received a reply yet. While the moral teachings are clear, the concrete application to specific situations requires an accurate understanding of the situation. This discernment seems to fall primarily to our responsibility as laity, to the extent that we are directly involved in those specific situations. We should not feel like we have to wait for the bishop to say something that would cause the Church to loose her tax-exempt status before we muster up the courage to act according to a well-formed conscience.<br /><br />I agree that the degree of cooperation is remote, with respect to cooperation in health insurance, when the insurance plan is chosen for you, for example, by an employer. But the purpose of the HIPPA law is to make health-insurance "portable," from employer-to-employer, which means that the individual has the primary responsibility for their "cooperation" in health insurance--Even when the employer arranges the health plan, the employee is technically responsible for each health insurance payment that is withheld from his paycheck, just as he is responsible for the taxes withheld from his paycheck, because he has the legal right to request that these withholdings not be made. When, beginning in 2014, a separate payment just for abortions will be listed among the withholdings in every paycheck, this will undeniably be formal cooperation in abortion, resulting in automatic excommunication according to CCC 2272).<br /><br />But, to further clarify the issue we face today, when we invoke the teaching of the Catholic Church which says that "when [morally upright people] are called to cooperate in morally evil acts they must refuse" (CSDC 399) we are referring to cooperation with regard to the act of procuring an abortion by means of insurance, not just cooperation in the insurance itself. With regard to the abortion, our shared culpability for that act increases in direct proportion to our technical proximity to the act, but it also increases in inverse proportion to the degree of freedom of the insurance company to choose not to pay for that particular abortion. But with regard to our duty to engage in conscientious objection, we incur grave guilt when there is technically a choice not to cooperate in abortion, and we choose to cooperate anyway: <br /><br />"It is a grave duty of conscience not to cooperate, not even formally, in practices which, although permitted by civil legislation, are contrary to the Law of God. Such cooperation in fact can never be justified, not by invoking respect for the freedom of others nor by appealing to the fact that it is foreseen and required by civil law. No one can escape the moral responsibility for actions taken, and all will be judged by God himself based on this responsibility (cf. Rom 2:6; 14:12)." (CSDC 399)Donniehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11652866052000790463noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7797210537401100321.post-40430265853298292002013-03-18T14:46:44.082-04:002013-03-18T14:46:44.082-04:00Are you certain you are relating the moral underst...Are you certain you are relating the moral understanding of the Church, regarding the necessity lf not paying premiums to compliant programs? <br /><br />In regard to healthcare, your degree of cooperation is remote if you are simply receive medical insurance from a particular provider (rather than providing medical insurance, like an employer does). Thus, you are no more culpable for receiving medical insurance from a compromised company than you are for paying taxes. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7797210537401100321.post-77725467068796999422013-03-18T14:43:33.698-04:002013-03-18T14:43:33.698-04:00It is interesting that you bring up the responsibi...It is interesting that you bring up the responsibility that we share with regard to how our tax dollars are used--I wonder how much more applicable, considering the present circumstances, is Father Al Lauer's teaching on "<a href="http://www.presentationministries.com/brochures/AbortTax.asp" rel="nofollow">Abortion and Your Taxes</a>?" Donniehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11652866052000790463noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7797210537401100321.post-28395794647209697392013-03-02T16:43:03.464-05:002013-03-02T16:43:03.464-05:00The articles on the news section of the USCCB webs...The articles on the news section of the USCCB website are intended for individuals in the general public, who have just as much responsibility to address public issues as the congressman.<br /><br />When we live under authorities, we do not abdicate our own responsibilities into their hands. Rather, we each still have the "<a href="http://sosuchouki.blogspot.com/2012/08/i-no-longer-call-you-slavesbut-friends.html" rel="nofollow">co-responsibility</a>" to undertake charitable initiatives for the good of society, keeping in mind that the "common good" is most concretely realized in the well-being of those who are most vulnerable, and that many of the most vulnerable members of society are being threatened by Obamacare.<br /><br />I am "my brother's keeper," and I will not pay to have him slaughtered--this attitude of conscientious objection is a grave duty for every citizen (<a href="http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/justpeace/documents/rc_pc_justpeace_doc_20060526_compendio-dott-soc_en.html#The%20right%20to%20conscientious%20objection" rel="nofollow">CSDC 399</a>), and it appeals to the responsibility of everyone to take positive action, because inaction (a sinful act of omission) could become formal cooperation in the the act of procuring an abortion.<br />Donniehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11652866052000790463noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7797210537401100321.post-7810226068046321182013-03-02T16:24:05.850-05:002013-03-02T16:24:05.850-05:00please read the article on the basis of who is the...please read the article on the basis of who is the attended audience. The article was a letter to a representative of congress to "...urge congress to address this problem...". Therefore, he is not calling members of the church to take action, but asking congressmen to take action.<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7797210537401100321.post-13126797826650704272013-03-02T16:22:10.193-05:002013-03-02T16:22:10.193-05:00According to the law, only membership in one of th...According to the law, only membership in one of the three Protestant health-sharing ministries (having been established before 1999) would exempt individuals from the insurance mandate. However, we should still encourage the formation of Catholic parish-based ministries. It is certainly possible for a parish to incorporate health-sharing into its ministries, through a "group membership" with CHM. For example, there is a group membership highlighted in the recent <a href="http://www.chministries.org/downloads/newsletters/CHMFebruary2013.pdf" rel="nofollow">CHM newsletter</a>. <br /><br />You might be encouraged by the fact that the freedom of the Church to form associations for the purpose of healthcare is explicitly mentioned in her social doctrine (<a href="http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/pontifical_councils/justpeace/documents/rc_pc_justpeace_doc_20060526_compendio-dott-soc_en.html#Cooperation" rel="nofollow">CSDC 426</a>). <br />Donniehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11652866052000790463noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7797210537401100321.post-6075810176485246482013-03-02T16:12:38.160-05:002013-03-02T16:12:38.160-05:00I am in dialogue with a priest about the situation...I am in dialogue with a priest about the situation and he was unaware that such a health sharing ministry would exempt participants from actual health insurance (which this is not).Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7797210537401100321.post-43371329154016441612013-03-02T16:11:15.658-05:002013-03-02T16:11:15.658-05:00Medishare members are exempt from the individual i...Medishare members are exempt from the individual insurance Mandate, according to their <a href="http://mychristiancare.org/" rel="nofollow">website</a>. <br /><br />The law says that members of a "Health Care Sharing Ministry" are exempt from the individual insurance mandate. It says so at Section 5000A(d)(2)(B) of the Internal Revenue Code <br />of 1986, as added by section 1501(d)(2)(b) of the Patient Protection <br />and Affordable Care Act (Obamacare).<br /><br />Medishare is the most expensive of the three health-sharing ministries, and it was barred from operating in the State of Montana precisely because it looks so much like insurance.Donniehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11652866052000790463noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7797210537401100321.post-63158952892695239642013-03-02T16:08:48.802-05:002013-03-02T16:08:48.802-05:00Do you know how Medishare and the other Christian ...Do you know how Medishare and the other Christian based options actually work with the HHS mandate? Meaning, the HHS mandate requires everyone to obtain health insurance by 2014 but Medishare is not health insurance. I am looking for the loophole in the law that permits it.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7797210537401100321.post-46023745700802202942013-03-01T11:25:44.267-05:002013-03-01T11:25:44.267-05:00To further clarify, to keep the "status quo&q...To further clarify, to keep the "status quo" means to keep fighting the mandate, "with all the energies that the Catholic Community can muster," according to the document "<a href="http://www.usccb.org/issues-and-action/religious-liberty/our-first-most-cherished-liberty.cfm" rel="nofollow">Our First, Most Cherished Liberty</a>." This document makes it clear that in this day and age, we must have the courage not to obey unjust laws.<br /><br />Certainly this clarified understanding of "status quo," with reference to the mission and identity of the Church, would include taking any positive initiatives that would preserve the freedom of religion and integrity of our consciences in the area of healthcare. For example, the local Catholic radio station here in in Cincinnati has just started to air advertisements for "MediShare," which is the most expensive of the three Protestant health-sharing ministries. <br /><br />I'm sure that the bishops will find it easier to denounce immoral health insurance more openly now that they can make positive proposals (of alternatives to health insurance) at the same time. As mentioned above, <a href="http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/motu_proprio/documents/hf_ben-xvi_motu-proprio_20121111_caritas_en.html" rel="nofollow">Canon Law was recently changed</a> to explicitly give the bishops permission to encourage Catholics to cooperate in Protestant Ministries of Charity, which would include the health-sharing ministries. However, even though the US Bishops have the authority to speak about faith and morals, even as they apply to health insurance, many of them have chosen to say the minimum, and let reasonable people make the logical conclusions about health insurance. As Pastors of the Church in America, they are prudently walking a thin tightrope, anchored on one end to the Church's tax-exempt status, and on the other end to vulnerable Catholics who need to be gently taught that real freedom of conscience is based on honest integrity informed by the truth, which stands in stark opposition to the <a href="http://romancatholicblog.typepad.com/roman_catholic_blog/2005/04/thanks_to_willi.html" rel="nofollow">dictatorship of relativism</a> which claims that "those in power can do whatever they want, and justify themselves by claiming that they are following their conscience," without any reference to the truth, to reality. <br /><br />More recently, however, the Bishops have indeed declared that this issue of "providing insurance coverage for sterilizations, contraception, or abortifacient drugs, [and] participating in or facilitating an abortion," involves a "major threat" to the Catholic Faithful. In using the terms "facilitate an aboriton," they invoke the penalty of excommunication described in <a href="http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/para/2272.htm" rel="nofollow">CCC 2272</a>. They have restated that "We cannot now abandon [the faithful] to be forced to violate their morally well-informed consciences." Please see their recent <a href="http://capwiz.com/catholicbishops/callalert/index.tt?alertid=62432636" rel="nofollow">statement and call to action</a>. <br />Donniehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11652866052000790463noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7797210537401100321.post-69558045244065147242013-03-01T11:25:03.973-05:002013-03-01T11:25:03.973-05:00Bishop Lori of Baltimore was pretty clear in his r...Bishop Lori of Baltimore was pretty clear in his <a href="http://www.usccb.org/news/2013/13-040.cfm" rel="nofollow">recent statement</a>: It is not the bishop himself, but the new insurance regulations that are forcing faithful Christians to follow their well-formed consciences and drop their old insurance. <br /><br />If the bishops were to react too quickly, there could be a mass <a href="http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/para/675.htm" rel="nofollow">apostasy</a>, because there is already mass <a href="http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/para/2089.htm" rel="nofollow">incredulity</a>. For example, a priest in a nearby parish told me that many people are rejecting the message about religious liberty and health care. When I forwarded this message to Pope Benedict XVI through his twitter account, he <a href="http://www.zenit.org/en/articles/pope-benedict-s-address-on-resignation-from-the-see-of-rome" rel="nofollow">announced his resignation</a> a couple of days later (go figure), saying that the Church needs a leader with more "strength." Strength and courage are definitely needed: If the bishops were to wait too long to speak clearly about health insurance, it would cause <a href="http://www.scborromeo.org/ccc/para/2285.htm" rel="nofollow">scandal</a>, in the sense of leading people into sin. <br /><br /><a href="https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=4756675469360&set=vb.1069424467&type=2&theater" rel="nofollow">Bishop Slattery</a>, on the other hand, was quick to throw off the weight of the "millstone" from around his neck, over a year ago. He was one of the first bishops, that I know of, to speak very clearly and "not mince words" about dropping health insurance. <br /><br />Most other bishops have told the faithful, unofficially, to "keep the status quo." But Bishop Aquilla clarified that this means to "<a href="http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/exclusive-bishops-willing-to-go-to-jail-over-hhs-mandate" rel="nofollow">keep doing what you're doing. Keep fighting the mandate.</a>" It does not mean to keep your immoral health insurance. No bishop would say that.<br />Donniehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11652866052000790463noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7797210537401100321.post-52337631528847033012013-03-01T10:24:51.032-05:002013-03-01T10:24:51.032-05:00Have any bishops advised their flocks to opt out o...Have any bishops advised their flocks to opt out of their health insurance plan at this point?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7797210537401100321.post-65254724569577912602013-03-01T10:22:37.627-05:002013-03-01T10:22:37.627-05:00Here is another article about Solidarity and Subsi...Here is another article about <a href="https://www.facebook.com/krestaintheafternoon/posts/536068033080852" rel="nofollow">Solidarity and Subsidiarity</a>.Donniehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11652866052000790463noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7797210537401100321.post-76959323752714219272013-02-21T21:56:24.888-05:002013-02-21T21:56:24.888-05:00Taxes belong to the taxpayer even as they are admi...Taxes belong to the taxpayer even as they are administered by the administration. This is important because abortion, contraception, sterilizations, trangenderism, transhumanism, highjacked vital organs and non-vital organs, face-lifts is not healthcare. Healthcare must be life saving. Surgery must be life saving. Obamacare will pay so little to obstetricians that most will leave the field. This will be done with the deep pockets of the taxpayer. The citizen will be competing against himself for favorable healthcare. And I do not put it above Obama to only treat his cronies after all there are exemptions which are not forthcoming to the Church charities. Obamacare is not healthcareMary De Voehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13772658924060834614noreply@blogger.com